This is an application for leave for direct access to the Constitutional Court filed in terms of s 167 (5) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, 2013 as read with r 21 (2) of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016. The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by the respondent against a judgment issued in favour of the applicant by the Labour Court. If granted leave, the applicant intends to bring an application in the main alleging that the Supreme Court had acted unlawfully in setting down the appeal in the manner it did and thus violated the Constitution. More
The Applicant was aggrieved and has approached this Court for direct access in terms of s 167 (5) (a) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. The Applicant submits that three of his fundamental rights enshrined in Chapter 4 of the Constitution were infringed by the Supreme Court in SC 09/20 through judgment number SC-24-22. As already noted, the three rights that the applicant alleges were infringed are the right to the protection of the law as enshrined in terms of s 56 (1) of the Constitution, the right to a fair hearing enshrined in s 69 (2) of the Constitution and... More
This is a court application made in terms of s 85 (1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe (No. 20) Act, 2013 (‘the Constitution’), which section provides for direct access to this Court in the pursuance of the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms as enshrined in Chapter 4 of the Constitution, and also, alternatively, direct access ostensibly motivated pursuant to s 167(5) of the Constitution. More
This is a chamber application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court, from a decision of the Supreme Court in terms of r 32(2) of the Constitutional Court Rules S.I. 61/2016. The rule provides that “a litigant who is aggrieved by the decision of a subordinate court on a constitutional matter can apply to the Constitutional Court for leave to appeal against such decision”. More
The constitutional matter before the Constitutional Court (“the Court”) for determination is whether s 353 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07] (“the Act”) is constitutionally invalid. The section authorises the imposition of a sentence of moderate corporal punishment on a male person under the age of eighteen years who is convicted of any offence. The matter came to the Court by way of the procedure for confirmation of orders concerning the constitutional invalidity of any law or any conduct of the President or Parliament made by another court. More
